Submitted by Dr. Roland R. Clarke Energy Consultant
Edited 4 April 2020 (2.02PM)
Dear David King:
I would like to signal my intention to take future action that may be construed as an attempt to break the Barbados curfew law on Wednesday 08 April 2020.
I respectfully request that the arresting officers wear protective masks. I do not wish to be infected by them.
My point, is that the officers of the Government of Barbados do not practice social distancing.
Why do I intend to attempt to break the law?
I have no choice. Here is my story.
I am a citizen and resident of Barbados who visited the USA for three weeks in recent times. I returned to Barbados on Tuesday 17 March. I immediately placed myself in social distancing at a local hotel for one week. This was followed by a second week at another hotel.
My intent was to do the recommended 14 days of distancing as I live with my elderly 89 y.o. mother who is prone to severe respiratory conditions. Further, I have several underlying medical conditions that put me at high risk to an unfavourable outcome from the COVID-19 virus.
About two hours after checking into the second hotel, their management sent me an email indicating that there was a recent case of COVID-19 at their hotel. My heart fell.
I subsequently gathered that the incident happened about 5 or 6 days prior to my arrival at the second hotel.
Given that I had booked my stay 24 hours in advance, it means that the hotel knew full well what their recent experience had been, and they did not give me the option to refuse. Even further, the hotel also indicated that the Government of Barbados was fully involved in the matter. They too did not share the information with the general public. In my view, this is a breech of public trust by the Government of Barbados.
Indeed at a later date, the Barbados COVID-19 Czar confirmed in a press meeting that the public does not need to know the places where COVID-19 has been found in Barbados. I strenuously disagree. Believe me, had I known, I would not have checked into the second hotel. I would have found an alternative temporary residence to continue my 14 day sojourn.
Given my experience, I made a decision to extend my period of social distancing for another week. That is, to count 14 days from my check-in to the second hotel.
So here I am in a third temporary accommodation until next Wednesday 08 April 2020. None of this is free for me.
Today, I am faced with the prospect of being arrested for doing the right thing of socially distancing myself after short term international travel to the USA.
Therefore I stand by my request above. I respectfully request that the arresting officers wear personal protective apparatus, and that I be placed in a detention facility that is medically appropriate for someone with my pre-existing conditions. Even further, should the arresting officers choose to release me, I respectfully request police escort to my home so that I will not be arrested again.
@Miller
Trinidad considers Barbados not as an independent nation state punching above its weight but simply as an economic colony to be exploited as a source of easy forex
+++++++++++++
Are you saying that Trinidad sees Barbados as a vassal state of T&T?
@Sargeant
Miller is echoing the views of Market Vendor exposed in a recent video gone viral.
David u ought to be ashamed of self picking sides for govt
Govt has shown they do not have the ability in times of crisis to be practical in their reasoning hence all the rightful crticisms they are receiving
Another messed up day for many who had expected smooth sailing by way of online orders
Too bad govt has now created a bigger mess politically and socially
Society cussing politicians and the private sector and people mad as hell with each other and all that is happening
Wuhloss if only 2020 was hindsight
Govt has tied a noose around its neck because it failed to tell the truth
Dribbler the verified facts lies within the Constitution
Too bad if u dont or never read it
Maybe u need to sit down and take a.read before dribbling all over the blog
Come Now Mr Blogmaster re “Again, retired old ass supposedly educated [men[ trapped in the behaviour of children.” Speak for yourself, bro….. Which part of my response to either of the gentlemen was childish!…This is a blog…an opinion talk shop… to respond to another’s remarks in a rational way is surely NOT childish.
That many here find it necessary to be childish and call others moron, deeb, dumb face, illiterate and more is unfortunate…I did that in 2nd and 3rd…but by the time I got into upper school debating was an art form of fact based analysis…two teams taken contentious issues and aggresively presenting solid facts for and against…no name calling nor BS…I still operate on that basis bro!
Folks like @Mari annoy me at that basic level as they would be laughed out of those rigorous debates because he does not deal in facts… the other much more intelligent crew of the 2 docs and Austin are simply rude and obnoxious when they are losing on logical presentations …
I don’t come here to be rude rather I come here to discuss the issues but I will not back down because a fella is rude…. lata for that folly!
I gone.
RE @Doc, get real. Mine is a blog post not the Lancet.
MINE IS A BLOG POST AS WELL! UH LIE BUT I AM CORRECT AND YOU ARE WRONG!
WHY ARE WE HERE? TO BE ACCURATE OR JUST TO BULL SHIT?
ONE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR TO THINK THAT BU IS THE LANCET.
ALTHOUGH BU IS NOT THE LANCET, HIGH STANDARDS OF MEDICINE HAS BEEN PUT ON ITS PAGES BY YOURS TRULY
RE I am sure the remark on efficacy of hydroxocholoquine was clearly understood by all in THIS ARENA who have read these blogs over the last several days to simply imply that ideally the drug works as well as it’s touted to do and cure folks like a vaccine would.
IN WHICH CASE all in THIS ARENA who have read these blogs over the last several days AND HAVE THAT OPINION ARE ALL WRONG!
PLEASE KINDLY NOTE THAT
VACCINES DONT CURE DISEASES ……VACCINES ARE PROPHYLACTICS ONLY
2 AGAIN: EFFICACY DOES NOT HAVE THE MEANING THAT YOU ASCRIBE ABOVE. YOU ARE HARD OF HEARING AND ABOVE REPROOF
EFFICACY AND EFFECT ARE NOT THE SAME THING IN PHARMACOLOGY: LOOK IT UP AND STOP CONTRADICTING ME
https://www.managedcaremag.com/archives/2013/1/effectivenessefficacy-difference-too-often-ignored
RE no editor of a reputable paper or media house would allow an “op-ed that was NOT grounded in verifiable facts” on their editorial pages. …
ACTUALLY THIS IS DONE DAILY IN THE NYT AND HUFFPO ETC AND SEVERAL OTHER SO CALLED REPUTABLE US NEWSPAPERS
RE I don’t come here to be rude rather I come here to discuss the issues but I will not back down
YOU MEAN LIKE “Did somebody steal your favorite toy when you were young or something… and you never got over that anger ”
RE debating was an art form of fact based analysis…two teams taken contentious issues and aggresively presenting solid facts for and against
YOU CAN NOT aggresively presenT solid facts for and against IN ANY DISCUSSION OR DEBATE WITH ME ON MEDICINE.. YOU CAN AT BEST BULL SHIT
YOUR PITHY PUERILE PEDESTRIAN PATHETIC PLOY TODAY AND ON CERVICAL INJURIES AND EMERGENCY POST MORTEMS ARE JUST A FEW EXAMPLES OF NOTE
SMH! Doubly so, OMG!
Messrs Mariposa, PLEASE cite me where in the Bdos constitution is gives validity to your remark that “the verified facts lies within the Constitution” that speaks to the issue on Bdos having standing for TnT citizens against their own govt…. or that Bdos had a constitutional OR CCJ case with the 35!
The Barbados constitution speaks of our govt power over its citizens, the rules and regs of our institutions and the power of our executive officials among other coded rules.
It does not verify anything with regards to assert power over non-nationals and their birth country nor our ability to exert power over another nation beyond announcing war.
So please in your informed awareness tell WHERE it validates what you are suggesting. What could the govt do based on the constitution to force the TnT issue in another direction according to you based on a specific clause.
Just do THAT for the blog. Don’t talk AROUND IT..show it! Thank you!
Dribbler i didnt come here to debate i laid out a position based on constitutional law clear and simple stating that under a democracy ( which i belive Trinidad laws are constitutionally attached and binding
A country cannot deny its citizen a right to free movement
Since barbados is also a democracy barbados can challenge Trinidad policy of denying the 35 a right to free movement within their homeland
A legal principle founded on a number of reasons 1. Trinidad cannot by law deny its citizens movement to their place of birth
2. barbados does not have the resources to feed or housed the 35 Trinidad citizens
As i said the goodwill gestures as well intended can have negative consequences
@ Mariposa
Don’t allow yourself to be drawn in to meaningless arguments about the fine print or interpretations in the constitution, unless you are a legal theorist. If people want to satisfy themselves with silly gamesmanship, so be it.
It is not debating, nor is it common sense. If they want to make a point, then go on and do so. At best these questions are rhetorical, or at worst just passive/aggressive malice. The secret is in the name.
Avoid them like the plague.
Doc ok I am wrong on the use of efficacy on this blog re Hydroxocholoquine…SMH!
I am sure we are pleased for your clarification….. but respectfully in the context of the extensive blog discussion on the endless impact of the covid19 it was accepted (i believe) that a vaccine is a ‘cure’ for COVID like the measles vaccine ‘cured’ MMR as a problem in society or the chickenpox vaccine ‘cured’ that problem as a scourge…. In short, although COVID would still be around we would not see this level of contagion and issue if a vaccine was developed (or hydroxocholoquine was fully approved).
That was the thrust of the discussion.
That accurate and specific details on the vaccine being a prophylactic or that efficacy connotes a clear meaning in pharmacology is accepted and logged in our knowledge base. Phew!
Hal you are correct
@Mariposa…again you are not making sense sir. … If you “didnt come here to debate” then why are you here making assertions about law and the constitution which you CANNOT validate?… If you are not debating then you are 1) either making a statement of indisputable fact to inform the blog , 2) asserting an opinion unsupported by fact to provoke or 3) just being a busybody.
No sir you DID NOT lay “out a position based on constitutional law clear and simple stating that under a democracy …A country cannot deny its citizen a right to free movement”…. That’s factual accurate but does not deal in the reality of the Minister’s decree.
I repeat to you…under what basis does Barbados as a democracy have the GROUNDS to “challenge Trinidad policy of denying the 35 a right to free movement within their homeland”….What is Barbados standing sir in that court matter?
In this instance the TnT national security decree by their Minister Young provided the legal basis for the denial.
How was Barbados going to argue your supposed “legal principle founded on 1. Trinidad cannot by law deny its citizens movement to their place of birth” when it was effectively superseded by the decree!
What does “2. barbados does not have the resources to feed or housed the 35 Trinidad citizens” have to do with this matter as a legal principle… At worst we simply sue TnT and get back all monies spent.
You didn’t come to debate so I suspect your statements which I reviewed and pushed back against with details are indisputable facts!… You dont want to debate rather just make statements that have little basis in fact!
Carry on smartly…you have many admirers.
Looka I dun did this…you going around in circles to mek sport!
RE a vaccine is a ‘cure’ for COVID like the measles vaccine ‘cured’ MMR as a problem in society or the chickenpox vaccine ‘cured’ that problem as a scourge…. In short, although COVID would still be around we would not see this level of contagion and issue if a vaccine was developed (or hydroxocholoquine was fully approved).
A VACCINE IS NOT A CURE FOR ANY DISEASE SIR
NO DISEASE HAS BEEN CURED BY A DISEASE
A VACCINE IS A PROPHYLACTIC ONLY
DESPITE MMR FOLK STILL GET MEASLES MUMPS AND RUBELLA IF THEY ARE NOT VACCINATED BECAUSE THE CAUSE OF THE DISEASE IS STILL AROUND
WORK ,ON YOUR ACCURACY MAN
LOL…@Mari I can see you were always playing…
The questions I asked YOU were to clarify statement YOU had made and asserted were based on the constitution… if you are saying that it’s based on that then surely you can say where and how.
I didn’t ask you to clarify ANY point I made. I asserted clearly why I believe you are wrong. You have not yet defined why you are right….so to run away from those questions is to run away from YOUR own assertions.
Amusing but not surprising.
NO DISEASE HAS BEEN CURED BY A VACCINE, SORRY